POST MASTER GENERAL & ORS. V. MR. MAC-CAJETAN AGBASI

More documents

Recommendations

Info

6 PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - SERVICE OF COURT PROCESS: Effect of failure to serve a court process where such a service is required "It is undoubtedly trite, that failure to serve court process where such a process is required is a fundamental defect. Thus, absence or lack of proof of service of court process on a party deprives a trial or even appellate court the necessary competence of jurisdiction to determine the case before it. See AUTO IMPORT V. ADETAYO (2002) 18 NWLR (PT.799) 544; SGBN V. ADEWUNMI (2003) 10 NWLR (PT.829) 526; MBADINUJU V. EZUKA (1975) (1994) 8 NWLR (PT.364) 535; SCOTT EM-AKPOR V. UKAUBE (1975) 12 SC 41; UBN PLC V. OKONKWO 92004) 5 NWLR (PT.867) 445; KDA V. OGUNMOLA (2006) 13 NWLR PT.997 PAGE 377 AT 395, paragraphs H-C, respectively." Per SAULAWA, J.C.A (Pp 16-17,Paras G-C) - read in context ISTIFANUS THOMAS, J.C.A (Delivered the Leading Judgment): This is an appeal against the judgment of the Federal High Court, Port Harcourt in suit No. FHC/PH/126/95 delivered on 30th November 1999. The lower court's decision was against the appellants in which the 5
plaintiff/Respondent had claimed severally and jointly against the defendants/appellants, special damages and loss of profit as a result of the failure to deliver an overseas postal parcel under contract Exhibit 1. Dissatisfied with the decision, appellants appealed to this court and they were granted leave to raise and argue points not raised and argued in the lower court. The appellants were also granted by this Court to amend their notice of appeal and to file and argue one additional ground of appeal. From the amended and additional grounds of appeal totaling 9 grounds of appeal the appellants have their brief from which they distilled and formulated six (6) issues that read as follows: "1. Whether the failure of the learned trial Judge to consider and pronounce upon Exhibit 1 containing the terms and conditions of the contract occasioned a miscarriage of justice. 2. Whether the learned trial Judge properly evaluated the evidence, before him and was right in the conclusion reached thereby. 3. Whether the learned trial Judge rightly placed the onus on the defendants to prove that they delivered the parcel to the addressee. 4. Whether the judgment of the trial court which is based on the provisions of the Nigerian Postal Service Department Act Cap 322, which was no longer in force at the time of commencement of the action and judgment is valid. 5. whether the learned trial Judge was right when he failed to apply well known principles of law to the proved and accepted facts. 6
Page 2 and 3: POST MASTER GENERAL & ORS. V. MR. M
Page 4 and 5: "It is well settled law that, once
Page 8 and 9: 6. Whether in the circumstances of
Page 10 and 11: P. J. Olayiwola Judge 13-4-99 From
Page 12 and 13: the respondent that there were proo
Page 14 and 15: account for their (sic) where about
Page 16 and 17: on 22/3/2005 and raised therein six
Page 18 and 19: fundamental defect. Thus, absence o
Page 20 and 21: That fortiori the judgment delivere
Page 22 and 23: There was as usual no proof that th
Page 24: NWANKWO (2003) 9 NWLR (part 826) 59

POST MASTER GENERAL & ORS. V. MR. MAC-CAJETAN AGBASI

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?